Authored By: Clara Jane Mwende Gitonga
Strathmore University
INTRODUCTION
Visualise a young child, no older than fifteen, scrolling through social media platforms such as TikTok or Instagram. During this innocent scrolling, they come across a photo of their face and body, but the image of them is unclothed. In their mind, they have neither sent such a picture nor taken such a picture, but regardless, they can identify and see that the picture on their phone is them.1This scenario sadly has become reality for many children and teenagers in our current world.2
As society shifts into a more digitally oriented world, the widespread presence of social media continues to grow as it provides opportunities for jobs such as content creation.3 Kenya, too, has witnessed this switch, and with the growth of technology, so do Kenyans struggle with leveraging their social media presence into a means of economic income.4 The drive to monetise online activities often pushes parents and guardians to expose their children to online activities such as social media through opening and managing accounts for them.5 This is just an example of how children are exposed to online activities and, therefore, tend to be more susceptible to sexual harassment and abuse.
Statistically, sixty-seven per cent of children aged between 12 and 17 have access to the internet, allowing them to take part in various online activities such as playing online games and interacting with other people through social media.6 However, this exposure to online activities, whether under supervision or not, heightens the risks of the children becoming victims of online child sexual exploitation and abuse or sexual harassment.7 Consequently, this raises the question of the adequacy and applicability of the Kenyan legal framework in protecting children from OCSEA.
In light of the previous paragraph, this research paper shall critically assess the Data Protection Act, the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act, the Sexual Offences Act, the Children’s Act and the Constitution in relation to OCSEA. In addition, the paper shall include a comparative analysis of countries with stronger and more efficient laws against OCSEA, such as Australia and Brazil.
BACKGROUND
Online child sexual exploitation and abuse, herein known as OCSEA, encompasses creation, dissemination and sharing of child sexual abuse material(CSAM), online grooming and Perceived First Person Self-generated Child Sexual Abuse (PFPSCSA).8 Deepfake is derived from the words deep learning and fake.9 Deepfakes involve images or videos altered through technology driven by artificial intelligence to create realistic images and videos of a false representation.10 This technological advancement provides a fertile ground for perpetrators to execute online grooming through the use of deepfakes, consequently giving rise to Child Sexual Abuse Material and by extension OCSEA 11This research will focus on two types of OCSEA: online grooming and self-generated child sexual abuse material via means of deepfakes. Online grooming is characterised by the act of forming a relationship which enables an environment where abuse and exploitation12is occurring both offline and in the digital space.13Ideally, online grooming and the use of deepfakes should be controlled, and children should be protected against such abuse and harassment.
In Kenya, Article 53(2) of the Constitution asserts that the best interests of a child are paramount.14The best interests of a child are principles that facilitate the child’s right to survival, protection, participation and development.15 However, ensuring that these rights are protected, especially when it comes to the realms of online child sexual exploitation and abuse, remains a formidable challenge.16 Section 33 of the Children’s Act acknowledges grooming as an offence punishable by an imprisonment term not exceeding ten years or a fine of not exceeding two million or both.17 Despite the act recognising both the physical and electronic facets of grooming,18the punishment for the offence is lenient, in light of the profound psychological and physical turmoil the children go through after being groomed.19
The Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act is designed to provide for offences relating to computers, and the Data Protection Act aims to safeguard people’s data. However, the Data Protection Act and the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act do not address grooming nor speak to it, despite the offence taking place online through the use of computers and the sensitive personal data of the child being abused. This proves to be a problem since perpetrators are engaging more with social media, online video games and the internet as a means to carry out grooming.20 The phenomenon of grooming is frequently compounded by manipulative tactics involving the use of explicit photos of children who either send them voluntarily or the perpetrators generate the photos using AI, also known as deepfakes.21AI, the shortened name of Artificial Intelligence, does not have one specific definition; this is because of the diversity it entails.22AI has multiple uses, such as the use of chatbots, the creation of images and videos, and smart cameras.23
The act that would govern the sexual offences in Kenya would be the Sexual Offences Act. However, the act does not provide for elements for one to be convicted of grooming, just as they lay out the elements of sexual crimes such as rape or defilement. Not only that, but the act in itself does not recognise grooming as a sexual crime despite the Children’s Act having provided for this. This leads my research paper to the following problem statement.
Online grooming and the use of deepfakes have become prevalent in the world today with the growth of technology and the internet.24This is majorly facilitated by AI and the lack of harmonised and adequate laws governing online grooming and deepfakes.25The Data Protection Act, despite being intended to protect citizens’ data, does not protect the sensitive personal data of children. Not only this, but the Computer Misuse and Cybercrimes Act does not acknowledge online grooming nor speak on the emergence of deepfakes, despite the crimes happening to children taking place online via computers.
The Sexual Offences Act does not acknowledge or lay out the elements for one to bring the offence of online grooming or the manufacturing of synthetic child pornography through deepfakes.26The Children’s Act, despite acknowledging online grooming as an offence and designating a punishment, does not impose a punishment that is proportionate to the damage inflicted on the child. Evidently, the laws that are meant to protect children against OCSEA, specifically online grooming and the generation of deepfakes, are not adequate in terms of addressing the problem, nor in their implementation.
JUSTIFICATION OF THE STUDY
The generation of deepfakes and online grooming are phenomenon sprouting out in today’s world as technology advances. The world today has become a modern village, and people have not only been showing their lives through posting pictures of themselves but also their children. This aspect of interacting through social media and the exposure of kids to the internet makes children more susceptible to being victims of deep fakes. Not only that, but the current generation of children can access social media, online gaming chat rooms and AI applications without parental supervision, making them more vulnerable to online grooming through these applications.
The beneficiaries shall be mostly the children and minors, including teenagers. The research aims to educate not only parents but also the children on what the law says about OCSEA and how parents and children can identify signs of online grooming, and how to prevent the escalation of CSAM through online grooming and the generation of deepfakes. This research work will prove to be not only an addition to the knowledge we have of law in relation to OCSEA, but it will also be educational and important in the Kenyan context as a guide to develop our current laws with the growing technology. With the prevalence of online grooming and the generation of deepfakes, this research will be of importance in the field of policy making and assessing current laws and their applicabilty especially in the Kenyan context.
CONCLUSION
The laws in place for OCSEA are not efficient in protecting children from the growing technology all over the world today. Some of the major reforms that could be implemented would be a ban, just as Australia did, and more lawswhich deal with AI . Not only that but bodies would be established to oversee the implementation of these laws that would be implemented. The state could also introduce education of parents on the dangers of AI, how to identify online grooming, and how to prevent it. Children who have been victims of the manufacturing of deepfakes and online grooming can be taken to therapy, and the state could oversee this since it falls within the best interests of a child.
It is the duty of the state to protect its citizens’ rights as provided for by the social contract theory. The citizens do give up a little of their freedom to the state so that the state can protect them. The children, being one of the most vulnerable groups, need to be protected.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
ECPAT, INTERPOL and UNICEF: Disrupting Harm in Kenya: Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse, October 2021, 23.
Engelmann L, Weirich C, May-Chahal C, ‘ Developing quality standards for community-based online child sexual exploitation and abuse interventions’ 164, Child abuse and neglect, 2025 Haroon Sheikh, Corien Prins and Eric Schrijvers, Mission AI: The New System Technology, Springer, Switzerland,2023
Kamaku M, Mberia H, ‘The influence of social mediaon the prevalence of sexual harassment among teenagers: A case study of secondary schoolsin Kandara subcounty, Kenya’ 4(4) International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2014 Kloess A, Beech A, Harkins L, ‘Online Child sexual exploitation: Prevalence, Process and offender characteristics, 15(2) Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 2014
Masterson M, ‘When play becomes work :Child labor laws in the era of kidfluencers’ 169(2) University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 2021
Moreno F, ‘Generative AI and Deepfakes: A human rights approach to tackling harmful content,38(3) International Review of Law, Computers and Technology, 2024. Obiria M, ‘60 cases daily: Alarming threat of online sextortion of children’ Daily Nation 01 December 2025 <https://nation.africa/kenya/news/gender/60-cases-daily-alarming-threat-of-online-sextortion-of children-5283086#goog_rewarded> on 01 December 2025.
Olson A, ‘The double-sided of deepfakes: Obstacles and assets in the fight against child pornography, 56(3) Georgia Law Review,2022.
Prakash G, ‘Role of prohibitory legislation in preventing Online sexual abuse of children: A critical social-legal analysis’ 2(2) Unitedworld law journal, 2018.
Schuett J, ‘Defining the scope of AI regulations’, 15 (1) Law Innovation and Technology,2023. Wafula R, ‘Juxtaposing social media influencers and traditional Media in Business promotion in Kenya, 1(1), International Journal of Multidisciplinary Research and Innovation,2022. Wefers S, Dieseth T, George E, Overland I, Jolopara J, McAree C, Findlater D, ‘Understanding and Deterring Online Child Grooming: A qualitative study,’19 Sexual offending: Theory, Research and Prevention, 2024,
1 Prakash G, ‘Role of prohibitory legislation in preventing Online sexual abuse of children: A critical social-legal analysis’ 2(2) Unitedworld law journal, 2018, 347.
2 Kamaku M, Mberia H, ‘The influence of social mediaon the prevalence of sexual harassment among teenagers :A case study of secondary schoolsin Kandara subcounty, Kenya’ 4(4) International journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 2014, 422.
3 Wafula R, ‘Juxtaposing social media influencers and traditional Media in Business promotion in Kenya, 1(1),International Journal of multidisciplinary research and innovation,2022, 27.
4 Mbego S, ‘ The rise of influencer marketing and its implications on Kenyan legacy media houses’ revenue’ unpublished Master of Digital Journalism, The Aga Khan University, Nairobi, 2025, 2.
5 Masterson M, ‘When play becomes work:Child labor laws in the era of kidfluencers’ 169(2) University of Pennsylvania Law review, 2021,579.
6 ECPAT,INTERPOL and UNICEF:Disrupting Harm in Kenya:Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse, October 2021, 23.
7 ECPAT,INTERPOL and UNICEF:Disrupting Harm in Kenya:Evidence on online child sexual exploitation and abuse, October 202.
8 Engelmann L, Weirich C, May-Chahal C, ‘ Developing quality standards for community-based online child sexual exploitation and abuse interventions’ 164,Child abuse and neglect, 2025, .
9 Moreno F, ‘Generative AI and Deepfakes:A human rights approach to tackling harmful content,38(3) International review of law, computers and technology, 2024, 297.
10 Olson A, ‘The double-sided of deepfakes:Obstacles and assets in the fight against child ponography, 56(3) Georgia Law review ,2022, 867.
11 Olson A,The double-sided of deepfakes:Obstacles and assets in the fight against child ponography, 876.12 Wefers S, Dieseth T, George E, Overland I, Jolopara J, McAree C, Findlater D, ‘Understanding and Deterring Online Child Grooming: A qualitative study,’19 Sexual offending:Theory, Research and Prevention, 2024, 3. 13 Section 2, Children’s Act (2022).
14 Article 53, Constitution of Kenya (2010).
15 Section 2, Children’s Act (2022).
16 Obiria M, ‘60 cases daily:Alarming threat of online sextortion of children’ Daily Nation 01 December 2025 <https://nation.africa/kenya/news/gender/60-cases-daily-alarming-threat-of-online-sextortion-of-children-5283086# goog_rewarded> on 01 December 2025.
17 Section 22 (4) , Children’s Act (2022).
18 Section 2, Children’s Act (2022).
19 Wefers S, Dieseth T, George E, Overland I, Jolopara J, McAree C, Findlater D, ‘Understanding and Deterring Online Child Grooming: A qualitative study,3.
20 Wefers S, Dieseth T, George E, Overland I, Jolopara J, McAree C, Findlater D, ‘Understanding and Deterring Online Child Grooming: A qualitative study,’ 3.
21 Kloess A, Beech A, Harkins L, ‘Online Child sexual exploitation:Prevalence , Process and offender characteristics, 15(2) Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 2014, 131.
22 Schuett J, ‘Defining the scope of AI regulations’, 15 (1) Law Innovation and Technology,2023, 62.
23 Haroon Sheikh, Corien Prins and Eric Schrijvers, Mission AI: The New System Technology, Springer, Switzerland,2023, 49.
24Kloess A, Beech A, Harkins L, ‘Online Child sexual exploitation:Prevalence , Process and offender characteristics, 15(2) Trauma, Violence & Abuse, 2014,126.
25 Olson A,The double-sided of deepfakes:Obstacles and assets in the fight against child ponography, 875
26 Section 16, Sexual Offences Act(2006,)
